Jitendra Thakur v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50507 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -414 Year- 2017 Thana -MOTIHARI TOWN DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Jitendra Thakur son of Late Sukhdeo Thakur, resident of village- Godhwa, P.S.- Motihari Muffasil, District- East Champaran. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Executive Engineer, Nagar Parishad, Motihari. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar No.-7, Advocate For the Opposite Party No.2 : Mr. Raghwanand, Advocate For the State : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Motihari Town P.S. Case No. 414 of 2017 registered under Section 409/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR has been instituted on the ground that the petitioner, who was a Class-IV employee in Nagar Parishad, Motihari continued to discharge his duties beyond the date of superannuation and for the period worked beyond the date of superannuation, he has been paid salary which is recoverable.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50507 of 2017 (2) dt.09-11-2017 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that even if the allegations made in the FIR are taken to be true, none of the ingredients of the offence alleged under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code would be attracted against the petitioner. There is no allegation that he committed forgery in any record. The only allegation is that he was allowed to discharge his duties beyond the period of superannuation for which he has been paid his due salary.

Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Nagar Parishad have opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the Nagar Parishad submitted that the petitioner has been paid excess amount of rupees one lac seventeen thousand and fifty four hundred as salary for working twenty one months more after the date of superannuation.

Having regard to the nature of allegation, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Motihari Town P.S. Case No.414 of 2017, subject to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50507 of 2017 (2) dt.09-11-2017 3/3 conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- U T